mini-me

My letter to the editor

To the editors [of the Lafayette Journal & Courier] in regard to your unsigned opinion piece entitled "Keep gun permit records open to public":

"The Indianapolis paper wrote about permits that were granted despite recommendations from local police chiefs that the permits be rejected, according to the HSPA."

If you had bothered to do any research about handgun carry permitting in Indiana, you would know that the recommendation of the local police chief is essentially irrelevant. The state police are required to issue a permit to a person who has no violent criminal record and has not been adjudicated mentally incompetent. There is no discretion whatever, regardless of the recommendation of the local police. This is a good thing. I imagine that the chiefs of police of certain cities, Gary for instance, would and do recommend against issuance as a matter of course, regardless of the nature or character of the applicant.

Quoting the majority in Schubert v. DeBard, 398 N.E.2d 1339 (Ind. App. 1980):

"We think it clear that our constitution provides our citizenry
the right to bear arms for their self-defense. Furthermore, in
Matthews v. State, supra, our Supreme Court held that if it is
determined under IC 35-23-4.1-5 that the applicant has met the
conditions of the statute, the superintendent has no discretion to
withhold the license. 148 N.E.2d 337."


(http://www.constitution.org/2ll/bardwell/schubert_v_debard.txt)

If an applicant is wrongly denied, he has the courts on his side, and indeed could probably pursue a Federal civil rights case for deprivation of rights under color of authority.

And if a permit is mistakenly issued to a prohibited person? As a prohibited person, he's already in violation of federal law for possessing a weapon. It is, as you would know if you bothered to do your job, a federal offense for a prohibited person to even touch a single round of ammunition, let alone a firearm. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/922)

What is the point of publishing databases of people who have no criminal record, and are provably far less likely to commit crime, if not to ostracize and harass them? Why treat them like child molesters? The Star and Herald-Times manner of publishing the database belie any other explanation.
mini-me

A thought in passing

Something I just thought about: Parallel programming really isn't new. We've been doing it as long as we've been networking. Client-server interactions are one form of parallel programming.
mini-me

Goats

So I was thinking about the Day of Atonement and the ceremony of the two goats described in Leviticus 16. In verse 8, they're instructed to cast lots to choose which of the goats is to be sacrificed, and which is to be taken out into the wilderness. The goats represent Christ and Satan. Christ was sacrificed for us and Satan will be bound during the Millennium (Revelation 20). The thought I had was that they had to cast lots to determine which goat was which. God didn't instruct them to take a perfect beautiful goat and a diseased deformed foul goat. He told them to take two goats and cast lots to determine which was which. They could not tell the difference between Christ and Satan on their own. They needed God to show them!

It's much the same with us today. We need God to show us what is Godly and what is of Satan. 2 Corinthians 11:14 tells us that "Satan disguises himself as an angel of light". There is so much in the world today that looks good, that looks Godly to our deceived eyes, but in reality is sinful and hated by God. We need His guidance through His Word to show us what is of Christ and what is of Satan, and we cannot trust our own perceptions.
mini-me

Maybe I'm too pedantic

But I really hate when people say "24 x 7 x 365". That indicates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. The proper progression should either be "24 x 365" or "24 x 7 x 52".

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
mini-me

You gotta' be kidding me!

In which a large daily newspaper displays the extreme poverty that is American science education today:
Authorities have noticed an increase in high-caliber weapons in Los Angeles. One of the most startling incidents was when a Fabrique National 57, an assault pistol used to kill big game, was found in a victim's car by detectives investigating a double-homicide last year in North Hollywood.

"You use it on large lions, tigers and bears," said LAPD Deputy Chief Michel Moore, commander of the Valley Bureau.
From the Los Angeles Daily News article "Deadlier weapons triggered arms raids", emphasis added.

High caliber? Big game? I'm going to assume that this reporter did no research on the FN FiveseveN, whose name is derived from the cartridge it was designed around: the 5.7x28mm (0.224 inches), a souped up .22. High caliber it ain't. This cartridge is illegal for white-tail deer because it's TOO SMALL! Only an absolute idiot would try to hunt lions and tigers and bears (OH MY!) with this round. It would be suicide!

The only thing I can guess is that these idiots saw the "57" and decided it was bigger than a .50 caliber (e.g. bigger than a half inch) instead of noticing that it's 5.7 millimeters. These people must not be familiar with SI measurements. Seriously, a reporter whose job it is to research and find the truth, and the LAPD Deputy Chief! Both of these people should know better! The only rational conclusion is that they are too poorly educated to understand this or else they are willfully misrepresenting the issue.

I think the real kicker is that they call it an "assault pistol" (an oxymoron if ever there was one) and then describe it's use as hunting big game. We're constantly told by these people that "assault weapons" have no legitimate sporting use, but now they tell us that here is one used for a particular type of hunting? They just can't keep their story straight.

Contrast this with what noted gun writer and Hoosier farmer Frank James says: in a carbine it works OK as a farm gun for varmints.